Breakthrough in the Portrayal of Explosive Energy

Difficulty has always attended the evaluation of rock breaking energy available from explosives, owing to the complexity of the way in which it is released, and the destructive amplitude of the pressures. Many problems have arisen and continue with this difficulty, including the following: I. Formulation of improved compositions to deliver appropriate energy levels to the blasthole walls, or to deliver previous results at improved cost. How appropriate is it to use various ingredients, such as Aluminium, water, salt? 2. Claims over energy issues, resulting in wasted time and expense, over things that sound good in theory but are very difficult to tie down. 3. Purchasers of explosives make decisions based on claimed “Bang per Buck” from different manufacturers, where the estimate of “Bang”comes from simplistic numbers from various, very unequal detonation codes. The above problems are escalating as time progresses. Using the high level IDeX PC 2000 detonation code, we have found a way to portray the differences between formulations in a way which relates to their breaking effect in the field. The basic method is to plot the adiabat from the detonation state to full expansion in units which express the practical implications. Energy alone cannot deliver results, so we use the curve to examine its manifestations: pressure and temperature. Internal energy is plotted with these. The method displaces relative energy numbers, as it portrays the context in which the energy is available. It is used here to compare an ANFO, an emulsion and a doped emulsion, as well as the effect of Aluminium. The effect of the shock pressure regimes and temperature correlate well with what is seen in the field.